VIENNA—Iran is poised to greatly expand uranium enrichment at a fortified underground bunker to a point that would boost how quickly it could make nuclear warheads, diplomats tell The Associated Press. They said Tehran has put finishing touches for the installation of thousands of new-generation centrifuges at the cavernous facility—machines that can produce enriched uranium muc...

faisst wrote:Sounds like Mossad propaganda to justify military action against a sovereign nation.

Yes that wonderful sovereign that that bolsters Hamas and Hezbollah... I think you must be the only one foolish enough to believe your own propaganda. If you are wrong, do you mind if we give the Mossad your home address? I can't wait for Israel to kick the sh** out of Iran - just like they always do - except this time I don't think they'll show much in the way of restraint as Iran is oh-so-deserving of getting blown back to the stone ages with their well publicized rhetoric alone. Intent + Capability ='s ....... tick tock tick tock Iran's about to get it's clock cleaned.

They are exercising their legal rights under the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that they and we signed and Israel didn't. Our Secretary of Defense says that according to the best intelligence they haven't made a decision to develop a weapon. The IAEA says that they haven't worked on one since just after Bush deposed their enemy Saddam Hussein.

Lots of news lately getting the sheep ready for the next war. With China and Russia standing in solidarity with Syria, and with the massive economic fallout that would result from a war with Iran, what are the possibilities that this could escalate into something much larger than Iraq and Afghanistan for the US? Your and my kids aren't playing those war based video games for nothing....

faisst wrote:Sounds like Mossad propaganda to justify military action against a sovereign nation.

Yes that wonderful sovereign that that bolsters Hamas and Hezbollah... I think you must be the only one foolish enough to believe your own propaganda. If you are wrong, do you mind if we give the Mossad your home address? I can't wait for Israel to kick the sh** out of Iran - just like they always do - except this time I don't think they'll show much in the way of restraint as Iran is oh-so-deserving of getting blown back to the stone ages with their well publicized rhetoric alone. Intent + Capability ='s ....... tick tock tick tock Iran's about to get it's clock cleaned.

You, the Republican party and the Israeli government all have the same thing in common, you are all frothing at the mouth for another war.

I won't be told, I have a supernatural offer for you, and you can be redeemed if you believe just in me, and if you don't like it you can be tortured forever. I won't be talked to like that. That is the language of fascism and dictatorship. -Hitchens

And Israel is poised for a big attack jump. And we are on the brink of WW III in case no one has noticed. Or am I just a calamity howler. A few weeks or months will tell. But, do you think it an accident that we have two carrier task forces in the Gulf of Hormuz, and 16,000 Marines in Kuwait, and thousands more "moving out of Iraq?" I doubt it.

First, I would suggest the US carrier groups are conducting freedom of navigation exercises and not so subtly reminding the Iranians of US naval strength. Speaking softly is more effective when you carry a big stick.

Second, I find the IAEA to be creditable and independent. For those that were paying attention, they argued against the idea of an Iraqi nuclear program. That was one of the main rationalizations for our subsequent invasion and occupation of that country, "we cannot allow the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

Third, I wonder how much these new centrifuges are a result of the effectiveness of the Stuxnet cyber attacks that targetted, in part, 984 centrifuges at Natanz. Did we really just think the Iranians would give up?

Fourth and finally, I think how difficult this situation is to resolve. The Non-Proliferation Treaty permits the peaceful development of nuclear power, but this may be converted to prohibited non-peaceful uses. We do not want to push the Iranians so hard that they just drop out of the NPT (like North Korea did), adding to the 3 non-signatory nuclear powers already in the region (Israel, Pakistan and India). The Israelis are divided, but a significant number would prefer direct military action against Iran's nuclear facilities, regardless of the adverse consequences such actions might have on the US. And the US and Iran find themselves on an adversarial course that only further reinforces the positions of hardliners on both sides.

Now, lets say that a "budget crunch" arises and the City and the Police Dept are looking at ways to save....$2,000,000.

What's the easiest way to save $2,000,000 while having the least impact on the ability of the City and the PD to provide Police Services? You got it: Eliminate the Take-Home Patrol Car Policy.

100 cops don't need 100 cars. A fleet of 30 cars will more than meet the needs of On-Duty Cops to patrol the city and respond to calls for services. Eliminating 70 cars at a cost of $30,000 each....realizes a savings of....$2,100,000.

Of course something is lost. The City and the PD lose the "stated ability" of cops driving to/from work and to/from the grocery store of being able to make traffic stops and respond to emergency calls on their "off-duty" time.

But a $2,000,000 in savings isn't chump change.

What we DON'T want most Police Departments to do.....is to eliminate all Patrol Cars.....eliminate ALL radios.....eliminate ALL computers....and become so "cost conscience" that they take away ALL semi-automatic pistols and give their cops a revolver and six bullets....to "save money."

Some things make sense.

Other things do not.

Criminals have guns. Criminals have shotguns. Criminals have rifles. Criminals have ammo....lots of ammo in some cases.....and Fast Cars.

We neither expect the State Patrol to patrol our highways with bicycles....or mopeds....or 1966 VW Bugs.....nor do we expect Denver PD to eliminate its SWAT Units because of "budget concerns."

It is quite possible that the US could - and did - reduce its ability to "exterminate all human life on this planet ten times over" to "only" having the ability to "exterminate all human life on this planet - just once"....and still allow the US to "feel safe."

It's quite another thing to (in the face of Russian, Chinese, North Korean, Pakistan, India, and Iran's hoped-for nuclear arms) render the US as impotent as Barney Fife who had but a single bullet in his pocket.

Perhaps having a "mere" 300 Nuclear Arms is More Than Enough to provide a Sound Nuclear Deterrent for the US.....unless and until Iran has.....300 also....or 301....or 500.....or 1,000?????

Some....psychos....never rationalize this outcome: "I have a gun, The Cop has a gun. I might die. I better not try to shoot him. I'll just surrender."

Most psychos actually think this way: "I'll shoot first. I might have a bigger gun. I might have more guns. I might have more bullets. And First, Bigger, and More....WINS."

The Nuclear Arms Deterrent of Mutually-Assured Destruction ONLY works when both sides are at least "capable of thinking sanely and rationally." It can never and never will work when one of more sides are Complete Psychos.....who think in terms that "Bigger, More, and First Use" WINS.

Realistically, we appear to have no real concern of a nuclear war with Russia, China, or any of our allies....so far.....as they have no real concern from us.

Realistically, our only concern is with the Upcoming and Rising Nuclear Wanna-be's....who have no track record of "nuclear restraint" and who have, instead, a Good Track Record of actually praying to their god that both Israel and the US would be destroyed by their hands: Iran.

300 nuclear arms may be more than enough to serve the US purposes of "deterrent".....unless the issue becomes Iran. Once the issue becomes Iran, 300 nukes may not be enough of a deterrent; Iran may look at "300" as "weakness"....a "US weakness" that Iran may be able to easily match. (More, Bigger, and First Use...."wins"...to psychos.)

Thus, it actually may be "reasonable" to reduce the number of US Nukes to 500, 400, or even 300.....except when the issue becomes Iran and North Korea. Then 30,000 might not be even enough. (Think of the Two Hollywood Bank Bandits. The entire shoot-out took what? a half hour? And it never occurred to them that the longer it took, the more cops with better equipment would show up? Idiots don't think...rationally.)

Thus, while 300 may be "reasonable" but even 30,000 might not be enough to deter Iran......another "solution" to the "Iranian Nuke Problem" must be developed.

It makes little sense to ramp up the US Nuke Arsenal, with all the expense of it, because of Iran (and/or North Korea).

That's where World Diplomacy - a United World Diplomacy that includes Russia - must have a play.

And if that fails....a United World Military Option....that has no objections...even from Russia.

Because, right now, one of the only alternatives is this: An Israeli Pre-Emptive Strike (as Israel did with Iraq and Syria); an Iranian Response....which may draw in much of the Arab World and Russia....which could lead to 1/4th of the earth being destroyed....as all those nations (other than Israel) are destroyed...perhaps..."miraculously."

caldonio wrote:First, I would suggest the US carrier groups are conducting freedom of navigation exercises and not so subtly reminding the Iranians of US naval strength. Speaking softly is more effective when you carry a big stick.

Second, I find the IAEA to be creditable and independent. For those that were paying attention, they argued against the idea of an Iraqi nuclear program. That was one of the main rationalizations for our subsequent invasion and occupation of that country, "we cannot allow the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

Third, I wonder how much these new centrifuges are a result of the effectiveness of the Stuxnet cyber attacks that targetted, in part, 984 centrifuges at Natanz. Did we really just think the Iranians would give up?

Fourth and finally, I think how difficult this situation is to resolve. The Non-Proliferation Treaty permits the peaceful development of nuclear power, but this may be converted to prohibited non-peaceful uses. We do not want to push the Iranians so hard that they just drop out of the NPT (like North Korea did), adding to the 3 non-signatory nuclear powers already in the region (Israel, Pakistan and India). The Israelis are divided, but a significant number would prefer direct military action against Iran's nuclear facilities, regardless of the adverse consequences such actions might have on the US. And the US and Iran find themselves on an adversarial course that only further reinforces the positions of hardliners on both sides.